Efforts to understand the international financial turmoil undermining Latin American development have not succeeded in linking international financial changes with the domestic financial systems of the Latin American countries. The starting point of the paper is the role in Latin America of "dollarization," the increased use of dollars in the domestic economies and its attendant detrimental effects on economic policy. The paper claims that the international financial system operates as a "dollar bloc," analogous to the earlier sterling bloc and the contemporary franc bloc. However, the benefits of such blocs, which placed certain obligations on the center country, are not present under current arrangements.

Kenneth P. Jameson is a fellow of the Kellogg Institute and Professor of Economics at the University of Notre Dame. His publications include Mexican Economic Policy and Multinational Investment and Latin American Structuralism: A Methodological Perspective.

The author wishes to thank his colleagues in the Notre Dame Economic Development Workshop and René Cortázar for their valuable comments, though they bear no responsibility for remaining problems.

Barrington Moore's Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy is widely regarded as a contemporary classic, yet there have been few attempts to evaluate the validity of his argument on a large number of comparable cases. This article makes such an attempt on the universe of Western European cases which experienced some period of democratic rule between 1870 and 1939. It seeks (1) to explain what structural and historical features distinguish the breakdown cases from those countries which remained democratic, and (2) to trace the process of class coalition formation in the transition to democracy and the subsequent breakdown with these structural and historical features as a background. It argues that Moore's thesis does fit with some modification. All four breakdown cases were characterized by an authoritarian coalition of labor-repressive landlords, the state, and a politically dependent bourgeoisie. These groups did, in some way or another, come together to end democratic rule in the twenties and thirties. Moreover, in every case, large landholders did retain significant power into the modern era, which Moore argues is crucial for the path to dictatorship. In contrast, this was true in none of the democratic survivors. This difference can, in turn, be traced to the difference in landholding patterns in the previous century. However, in contrast to Moore's characterization of the conservative authoritarian path, the ruling coalition in the breakdown cases other than the German did not play the modernizing role that it played in the German case.

John D. Stephens is Associate Professor of Political Science and Sociology at Northwestern University. He is the author of The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism (Illinois 1979, 1986) and co-author of Democratic Socialism in Jamaica (Princeton, 1986).

Earlier versions of this paper were delivered at the meetings of the American Sociological Association, Chicago, August 1987, and at seminars at Northwestern and the Universities of California-Santa Barbara, Chicago, and Notre Dame. The author would like to thank participants in those seminars for comments, in particular, James Cronin, Roger Friedland, Jack Goldstone, Guillermo O'Donnell, Timothy Power, Charles Ragin, Arthur Stinchcombe, and Samuel Valenzuela. Comments by Valerie Bunce, Peter Evans, Daniel Garst, and Evelyne Huber Stephens on earlier drafts also improved the work. The paper was completed during the fall semester of 1987 while Professor Stephens was a faculty fellow at the Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame, and he would like to thank the Institute for its support.

A revised version appears as a chapter in Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Evelyne Huber Stephens, and John D. Stephens, Capitalist Development and Democracy (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992).

Frances Hagopian is an Assistant Professor of Government and of Social Studies at Harvard University. She was a fellow and guest scholar at the Kellogg Institute 1984-1987.

Scott Mainwaring is an Assistant Professor of Government and a member of the Kellogg Institute at the University of Notre Dame. He is the author of The Catholic Church and Politics in Brazil 1916-1985 (Stanford University Press, 1986).

The authors wish to thank Caroline Domingo, David Fleischer, Antonio Kandir, Tony Messina, Silvia Raw, and Sherle R. Schwenninger for their generous assistance in preparing this paper. It has also appeared as an article in World Policy Journal, Summer 1987.

Abstract

This paper analyzes the origins and problems of and prospects for democracy in Brazil. While Brazil has successfully passed from authoritarian to democratic government, it has yet to develop a well-defined and institutionalized democratic regime. Political institutions, particularly the legislature and the political parties, sometimes function as instruments of authoritarian rule rather than pillars of a democratic order. Many leading politicians of the current government, most notably President José Sarney, loyally served the military regime, and the military retains veto power over key legislation. Most important policy measures do not receive public or party debate, but are decided by bureaucrats in economic and planning ministries or in the central bank. Immense political, economic, and social inequalities persist, and the servicing of an onerous foreign debt constrains possibilities for economic growth and for improving maldistribution of income. Brazil's relatively smooth transition to democracy has impeded the institution building necessary for democracy's consolidation, discouraged popular participation in politics, and thwarted policy changes that might upset an extremely inegalitarian social order.

Frances Hagopian is an Assistant Professor of Government and of Social Studies at Harvard University. She was a fellow and guest scholar at the Kellogg Institute 1984-1987.

Scott Mainwaring is an Assistant Professor of Government and a member of the Kellogg Institute at the University of Notre Dame. He is the author of The Catholic Church and Politics in Brazil 1916-1985 (Stanford University Press, 1986).

The authors wish to thank Caroline Domingo, David Fleischer, Antonio Kandir, Tony Messina, Silvia Raw, and Sherle R. Schwenninger for their generous assistance in preparing this paper. It has also appeared as an article in World Policy Journal, Summer 1987.

This paper analyzes the problems, trends and prospects for food security in Mexico, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Chile. There are three main sections: The first evaluates the state of food security in the four countries. The second examines the development of their national food systems and the problems of food security in an historical context. Finally, the authors assess the prospects for food security in the region as a whole.

Solon Barraclough was the Director of the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development until he retired in 1984, since when he has continued to work as a consultant. In the spring semester of 1987 he was an invited fellow at the Kellogg Institute.

Peter Utting is a social scientist from Australia. Since 1978 he has been living in Nicaragua where he is working at the Research Center on Agrarian Reform (CIERA). He is also an occasional consultant for UNRISD.

This paper draws heavily on some of the major findings of research on food systems development and food security carried out by UNRISD between 1979 and 1986. Barraclough was project coordinator of the UNRISD study and both he and Utting prepared the project's overview report. An earlier version of this paper was published in Lateinamerika: Analysen und Berichte 10 (Hamburg: Junius, 1986).

During most of its lengthy history, the Catholic Church in Latin America has been identified with dominant elites and the state. This situation has changed in recent decades as Church leaders have supported popular protest aimed at changing unjust social structures. At the forefront of the process of ecclesiastical change have been a panoply of new grassroots groups, the most famous of which are the ecclesial base communities (CEBs). This paper examines the relationship between such grassroots groups and politics in Brazil. The author calls attention to the strong linkages between these groups and the hierarchy. He also underscores the central religious character of CEBs and other groups, even while arguing that these groups did have a political impact. The paper traces how the political activities of CEBs and other grassroots groups evolved over time, largely in response to macropolitical changes. It pays particular attention to the difficulties poor Catholics often encountered in acting in the political sphere.

Scott Mainwaring is Assistant Professor of Government and member of the Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame. He has written extensively on the Catholic Church and politics, social movements, and transitions to democracy. The author wishes to thank Caroline Domingo, Frances Hagopian, Margaret Keck, Alfred Stepan, and Alexander Wilde for helpful suggestions.

This paper examines the making of a state-owned conglomerate in Brazil, as a case study in state enterprise autonomy. It shows that the process of vertical integration and diversification undertaken by the Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, rather than simply an expression of managers' aspirations, satisfied both commercial and government objectives. The company's lack of dependence on subsidies was not a source of autonomy, but instead a source of vulnerability to government direction.

Silvia Raw received her Ph.D. from the University of Massachusetts in 1985, and is currently Assistant Professor of Economics at Vassar College. In the spring semester of 1986 she was an invited fellow at the Kellogg Institute. The research for this paper was supported by a grant from the Social Science Research Council and the American Council of Learned Societies, and made possible by the cooperation of the Companhia Vale do Rio Doce. The author alone is responsible for all conclusions and errors.

The purpose of this paper is to trace the development of the Dominican labor movement in the context of the economic and political changes that have taken place in the Dominican Republic since the Trujillo dictatorship. A main objective is to show how the subordinate role of the working class in Dominican society has changed little, despite the industrialization process initiated in the 1940s and expanded in the late 1960s, and despite the establishment of a democratic government in 1978. Both under authoritarian and democratic rule the Dominican labor movement has been a weak political force, largely excluded from the economic and political benefits associated with industrialization and the democratization of politics.

Rosario Espinal received her Ph.D. in Sociology from Washington University, St. Louis. She has been a guest researcher at the Swedish Institute for Social Research, Stockholm University; a faculty fellow at the Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame; and a visiting fellow at St. Anthony's College, Oxford University. She is co-author with José Oviedo of Democracia y Proyecto Socialdemócrata en República Dominicana (Santo Domingo: Ed. Taller, 1986) and author of Autoritarismo y Democracia en la Política Dominicana (San José: CAPEL, 1987).

The author wishes to thank René Cortázar, Frances Hagopian and Guillermo O'Donnell for their helpful comments on this paper.

This paper discusses the problem of political and ideological violence from the perspective of the psychological theories developed by the Swiss psychologist C. G. Jung. Drawing from primary and secondary sources in the field of Jungian psychology, the paper focuses on two concepts central to Jung's thought-shadow and archetype-and addresses their broader implications as psychological factors in the processes of political and ideological conflict and violence. The paper initially outlines the role of the shadow, the term used by Jung to describe the dark, unlived aspects of a person's personality, as a determinative factor in conflict and violence, not only on personal and social levels but on political and ideological levels as well. The broader role of the shadow as a source of political and ideological violence is then illustrated in a review of Jung's analysis of Nazi Germany, the only in-depth analysis of a single nation undertaken by Jung. The problem of the shadow is further treated as a source of misunderstanding and fear that has complicated immeasurably United States-Soviet Union relations in the post-World War II era and has contributed significantly to the nuclear dilemma confronting the world. Finally, the relationship between ideology and archetype, the most ontologically fundamental of Jung's concepts, is discussed in the context of the phenomenon of the shadow inherent in twentieth-century ideological belief systems in general.

R. Kevin Hennelly holds a B.A. in Economics from the University of Notre Dame, a M.S. degree in Foreign Service, and a J.D. degree from Georgetown University. He has worked for several years in the field of economic and social development, most recently with the Inter-American Development Bank in Washington, D.C. In the fall and spring semesters of 1984 and 1985 he was a guest scholar at the Kellogg Institute.

This paper evaluates the peasant response to grain policy in Nicaragua during the revolutionary period. The author presents an overview of the stages and effects of the 1979-1986 agrarian reform. He argues that a treatment of the peasantry as homogeneous is inadequate, and proceeds to differentiate the peasantry into categories based on participation of agricultural producers in one or more class processes. This framework and empirical evidence show that these categories were characterized at times by markedly different grain production and marketing strategies, which were affected in distinct ways by the policies of the revolutionary state. The class-based analysis allows for policy implications that other frameworks might not capture; in particular, a view of the sectors within the peasantry in which grain self-sufficiency might be reached.

Michael Zalkin is currently Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Notre Dame. From 1981-1984, he served as research economist for the Center for Investigations and Studies of Agrarian Reform (CIERA), Managua, Nicaragua, and he returned for shorter periods in 1985 and 1986. His work at CIERA included studies of the national economy, the agricultural sector and urban food distribution. In particular, he carried out an investigation of peasant production and marketing of foodgrains, upon which his dissertation is based.

This paper was initially presented at the XIII International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, Boston, Massachusetts, October 23-25, 1986. The content is based on collaboration by the author with CIERA. He wishes to thank CIERA, its staff, and particularly its Director, Dr. Orlando Nuñez Soto, for this opportunity. Work at CIERA is a collective effort, and therefore CIERA's researchers deserve much of the credit for the work within. He would also like to thank Caroline Domingo for her many editorial corrections and suggestions. However, the author alone is responsible for the views expressed.

This paper discusses the emergence and evolution of the ecology movement in Brazil from 1974 to 1986. The author argues that over time, a movement that was initially mainly limited to environmental issues came to address larger questions of models of development and politics. The paper begins with an overview of the world ecological crisis and the emergence of the ecology movement. It then discusses the particular ecological problematic in the Brazilian situation, before addressing at length the development of the ecology movement in Brazil since 1974. The author concludes with an analysis of diverging tendencies and viewpoints within the movement.

Eduardo Viola was a visiting fellow at the Kellogg Institute during the 1983-1984 academic year. He currently resides in Florianópolis, Brazil, where he is Associate Professor at the Federal University of Santa Catarina.

This paper was first presented at the 10th Annual Meeting of the National Association for Postgraduate Studies and Research in the Social Sciences, Campos do Jordão, October 21-24, 1986. The author wishes to thank the following people for their comments and criticisms: Julia Guivant, Scott Mainwaring, Paulo F. Vieira, Paulo Krischke, Ilse Scherer-Warren, Ary Minella, Maria Ignez Paulilo and Sérgio Boeira.

The Catholic Church in Colombia, like those elsewhere in Latin America, experienced considerable pressure from liberationist forces during the 1960s and '70s. In Colombia these forces have been successfully tamed within a coherent model of "neo-Christendom"-a form of conservative modernization in which tradition has been consciously wielded, the Church has combined organizational reform with the reassertion of a vertical authority structure, and the interpretation of the Church's social responsibilities has been limited to support of governmental reform and the teaching of general principles. During the 1970s and early '80s there was some rhetorical criticism of Colombian governments from the bishops, but it remained within the historical tradition of appealing to the consciences of the powerful rather than to the consciousness of the poor, and the unity of the Hierarchy was maintained towards the disciplining of clerical rebels. This corporate control over its own ranks has probably been the Church's major contribution to the stability of the oligarchical regime. By linking itself to the regime, however, the Church has become dependent on the regime's ability to preserve relative openness and legitimacy, both of which appear to be declining with the continuing challenge of armed guerrillas and the growing authority of the army. The Church has won ecclesiastical orthodoxy, but at the cost of autonomous social influence. Neo-Christendom may prove to be vulnerable to future change, particularly if the military were to come to power.

Alexander Wilde is Associate Academic Director of the Kellogg Institute. He was formerly Acting Secretary of the Latin American Program of the Wilson Center, Washington, D.C. and has taught at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Haverford College. He has written about the politics of Colombia for some twenty years. This Working Paper is part of a longer term study of the Church and politics in Colombia.

This paper examines the participation of traditional political elites in the transition to democracy in Brazil through an in-depth study of the political elite of the state of Minas Gerais. The first part of the analysis focuses on the political negotiations, crucial for the construction of the civilian regime, which allowed the traditional elite to recapture the political bases of its dominance: control of state office and political parties through which the elite organized channels of state clientelism. The second part of the paper discusses how the participation of this group in the governing coalition may undermine efforts to achieve democratic politics in Brazil. It concludes that open political competition among representative political parties holds the best prospects for consolidating democratic gains.

Frances Hagopian, a faculty fellow of the Kellogg Institute, received her Ph.D. in Political Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1986. Research for this paper was made possible by a Seed Money Grant from the Kellogg Institute. The author gratefully acknowledges comments received from Suzanne Berger, Caroline Domingo, Scott Mainwaring, Guillermo O'Donnell, and Silvia Raw on an earlier version of this work.

This paper examines the behavior of international private banks and their role as an endogenous source of crisis in Latin America during the 1970s. The analysis first summarizes an interpretation of private banking at the international level that was quite fashionable in the '70s. This interpretation rests on the tradition of portfolio theory, and projects banks as efficient, risk conscious, arm's length lenders, in an atomistic market which maximizes a risk-return calculus. In these circumstances borrowers face conventional upward sloping supply curves and encounter the much touted "discipline of the marketplace." This conventional view is then contrasted with an alternative institutional focus: the bank as a transnational firm in an oligopolistic market, which is destablized by new entrants. Coupled with an examination of how banks institutionally translate risk assessment into credit volume and price, this allows us to illustrate how permissiveness rather than discipline could be the expected outcome of the banking expansion of the 1970s. It also provides insight into the supply-side dynamics underlying overindebtedness, and thereby begins to lay a technical foundation supporting the Latin American assertion of coresponsibility in the crisis.

Robert Devlin has been an economist in the Economic Development Division of the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean in Santiago, Chile, since 1975. He has a Ph.D. in Economics from the American University in Washington, D.C., and has been working for the last few years on the subject of private banks, debt adjustment, and crisis in Latin America. He was a fellow of the Kellogg Institute in the fall semester, 1985.

Research for this paper received support from the Corporación de Investigaciones Económicas para América Latina (CIEPLAN) in Santiago, Chile, the Kellogg Institute of the University of Notre Dame, and the United Nations. The author is especially grateful to R. Ffrench-Davis, M. Marfan, J. Ramos, J. Weaver and J. Willoughby for their extensive comments on the manuscript. Helpful observations were also received from J.P. Arellano, E. Bartell, CSC., J. Estevez, D. Goulet, K. Jameson, J. Marshall, D. Ruccio, D. Wilson, and members of the Workshop on International Economics of CIEPLAN.

The Kellogg Institute promotes scholarship, learning, and linkages that address issues of critical importance to our world. At the center of our interdisciplinary community’s work are two key themes: democratization and human development.